tv FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX News April 19, 2015 11:00pm-12:01am PDT
shadow of certain death, finally dying at age 36. in his way. countless lives took the brunt of his wrath. and in the very end doc holliday can claim just one true friend. . thanks bob, we love you. >> i'm chris wallace, a florida man penetrates restricted air space landing his gyrocopter near the capital raising new concerns about security here in washington. >> this is not good, people. >> it may provide an opportunity for law enforcement agencies including the secret service to review their procedures. >> we'll discuss the latest in a growing list of security breaches with the chair of the house oversight committee, jason chaffetz and our sunday panel weighs in on who's watching the watch dogs. plus the 2016 race for president is now in full swing. we'll talk with two potential
candidates. >> the next president of the united states needs to figure one thing out quickly, how to be commander in chief and i thnk i can do that. >> the question is what the candidates have to deliver for the american working people. >> lindsey graham may offer the gop field and independent senator bernie sanders may take on hillary clinton from the left. we'll sit down with both of them all right now on "fox news sunday." >> and hello again from fox news in washington. it was a scary scene on the national mall this week when a florida postal worker flew his gyrocopter through some of the country's most restricted air space. just the latest in a string of troubling security lapses. we'll discuss that with the chair of the house oversight committee jason chaffetz. we want to begin with politics and race for the white house
rapidly ramping up, almost two dozen candidates were in new hampshire this weekend to win support for first primary and carl cameron is there. carl? >> thanks, chris, 21 potential white house hopefuls took the stage in the two-day first in the nation summit. it is a wide open race and it was a huge roster the biggest ever for new hampshire and every one of the leading candidates came with something to accomplish. >> for jeb bush, it was trying to reassure conservatives he's one of them. >> a lot of us are not looking for a republican in name only. i don't want a corpsanation on -- our side. >> i would match my record with anybody that's thinking about running or any governor that during the last 20 years. >> florida senator marco rubio who called bush his mentor, make
a break at the summit. >> i don't care what anybody tells you those standards will be used to force on states policies the federal government wants or you won't get federal money. >> chris christie proposed raising the eligibility age casting himself as a truth teller. >> some people say i'm too blunt and too direct and too straight forward. i think we can use a little bit of that in washington, d.c. >> kentucky senator rand paul blasted the entire field for criticizing obama clinton foreign policy but says they all take similar positions. >> the other republicans will criticize the president and hillary clinton for their foreign policy but they would have just done the same thing just ten times over. >> paul would do much less in an interview with fox news said he's in the middle of the gop road on foreign policy. >> i think as people find out about foreign policy what they find out i'm right in the mainstream of the republican party and number one priority of the federal government is national defense. >> wisconsin governor scott
walker closed the summit with his key note speech. >> tea party to establishment from social conservative libertarian, we do it all what people want more than anything, they don't just want a fight every they want somebody who fights and wins. >> former florida governor jeb bush got a cordial reception. lindsey graham got the most at ease and most jokes. chris christie who needed a good performance seems to be making a little headway in new hampshire. >> carl, thanks for that. let's bring in one of those republican candidates south carolina senator lindsey graham. senator, i want to start with the headline on the solan.com website, lindsey graham loses his mind for saying the man who flew in a gyrocopter, should have been forced down or shot down. are you serious about that?
>> deadly serious. i think our nation is war with radical islam. the primary goal of these groups is to attack our nation. washington is a prime target. this many years after 9/11 with this many groups warning to hurt us at home i'm astounded somebody can do what he did. i'm glad he's not hurt but that shows you how far defense is falling and constantly minimizes the threats we face as a nation. i will not be part of that. >> now, some people may say lindsey graham loses his mind for seriously considering running for president in 2016. carly -- >> okay. >> carly fiorina told us there's a 90% chance she'll get into the race. what's the percent chance you're going to get in? >> 91. >> seriously? >> yeah, i think so. i've got to put the means together. i think i got a good message and been more right than wrong and
criticized the president for leading from behind and being weak and indecisive, i think i have something to offer the party and nation. i make that decision in may if i can raise the money i'll do it. >> here's why some people are skeptical and let's put some issues up on the screen. you believe that climate change is real and the federal government must address it, you're open to raising taxes as part of a grand bargain. you support comprehensive immigration reform in your home state of south carolina, you are at this point running fourth behind walker and bush and cruz and 55% of those polled in your home state say they would not consider voting for you for president. are you too moderate? are you too far in the center on nondefense issues to win the republican nomination? >> not at all. i believe climate change is real but i reject the cap and trade solution of al gore.
he's made it religion. i think it's a problem. i'd like to clean up the air and water but become more energy independent and create jobs. i'm for offshore drilling and coal and clean coal and natural gas but lower carbon economy over time. clean up the air and create jobs in the process -- >> raising taxes as part of a grand bargain? >> i'm for simpson-bowles, it doesn't raise taxes it closes loopholes and takes the money we give to a few people and put it on the debt. 80 million baby boomers will retire in the next 20 to 30 years, we'll wipe up social security and medicare and have to adjust the age retirement for younger people. people in my income level will have their benefits means tested. democrats are going to want a simpler tax code. i'm for eliminating deductions and taking some of the money to buy down rates and put it on the debt. to me that's not raising taxes that's solving a problem.
>> senator, why do you think -- and i understand it's early why do you think you run so poorly in your home state? >> well, if i didn't think i could win south carolina, i wouldn't be talking to you. i had a primary with six opponents. i've been elected numerous times in south carolina. if i'm on the ballot, i'm going to win south carolina. >> i want to do a lightning round with you about some of your opponents. you say marco rubio is too o afraid of the right wing of the republican party. >> well, marco rubio, i think will be president one day, whether or not 2016 is his time, time will tell. he embraced immigration reform. he seems to have backed off. i'll let him explain why. i think it was securing your board and dealing rationally with 11 million, only way to solve this problem. i like marco. >> you took ted cruz to task for saying that the second amendment is the ultimate check against
government tyranny. >> the ultimate check against government tyranny is an informed electorate. i don't want to embrace the idea that i believe we want people to take to the streets with guns. i want people to go to the voting booth and check an out of control government by electing conservatives. >> as for rand paul and you've been very critical of his national defense security policy are you convinced that his recent tougher stand on some national security issues is genuine? >> i hope some of it is but he's the libertarian in a race. the lind saisey graham will beat barack obama's view of foreign policy and hillary clinton's view of foreign policy. he said at the summit that a terrorist detained under the law of war at gitmo is entitled to a
trial. i've been a military lawyer for 33 years and members of al qaeda can be detained as long as they are a threat to the nation without a trial. he wants to fight a crime, i'm fighting a war. big difference. >> let's turn to the nuclear talks with iran. president obama made news this week when he seemed to indicate he would be willing to lift sanctions faster than seem to have been agreed to in the framework deal instead of waiting until the iran has implemented all of the restrictions in the deal. here's what president obama had to say. >> our main concern here is making sure that if iran doesn't abide by its agreement, that we don't have to jump through a whole bunch of hoops in order to reinstate sanctions. >> senator, what do you think of that? what some people are rating
another concession to the iranians? >> i think barack obama's deal is deteriorating before our eyes. i don't think there's a snowball chance in hell it will pass as set up. i gives immediate sanction relief with no intrusive investigation. i will release nine core principles of what i think a good deal would look like, any time anywhere inspection of nonmilitary and military facilities will be a bipartisan must. this idea that we can't go where we need to go is going to fail. the chinese are talking about building five reactors for the iranians. any nuclear program enrichment program must be limited to one reactor. at the end of the day, you can't lift sanctions until the behavior of iran changes. they can no longer be a state sponsor of terrorism before you lift sanctions down the road. i think the framework presented for president obama is completely different in the eyes of iranians and congress won't look at this and have a say and vote before we lift
congressional sanctions. i don't think there's any chance we're going to lift congressional sanctions as long as you have sites still open. >> you're talking about the corker menendez deal which passed senate foreign relations committee unanimously and looks like it's going to pass house and senate. that would say congress has 30 days after the deal is finally presented to approve it or disapprove it. you're saying there's no chance that -- well, let me ask you, there's a flip side of it. it isn't that congress has to approve it what can happen, they can disapprove and the president vetoes it and all he needs is 34 votes for instance in the senate to make his veto stand up. are you saying he's not going to have 34 votes in the senate? >> i'm saying if there's a final deal that doesn't require any time anywhere inspections that the senate will not go along with that. i'm saying that if you keep hardened secret sites open, you're not going to get senate
approval. nobody in the senate on the bipartisan fashion trusts iranians, they lie and cheat and murderous regime and trying to develop a nuclear weapon. the framework i've been presented with has to be turned into a final deal. there is no way we're going to prove a deal that doesn't allow for inspections any time anywhere, remove all of the highly enriched u r uranium and limit for one reactor that can never be used to build a bomb. i'm highly confident of turning the world upside down that the framework if it does become a final deal will have a hard time getting through the senate because it is so weak. >> but just real quickly because we're running out of time. it doesn't have to get through the senate. it's the question as to whether or not the president's veto will stand up. are you saying you think the senate would override his veto? >> if the final agreement doesn't allow any time anywhere inspections it has a large
enrichment program and keeps an underground reinforced site open that it will be rejected large enough to override a veto because members of the senate understand that this is the most consequential vote we'll ever take. and the iranians can't be trusted. they lie and cheat and in my view would allow too many opportunities for them to break out. i'll wait and see how it looks on paper but if you don't have any time anywhere inspections forget about it i don't think any democrat or republican is going to agree to allow that to become binding. >> finally senator, we've got about a minute left. there was an article in the "washington post," that told me a lot of things i didn't know about you. it detailed the fact that when you were at the university of south carolina as an undergraduate, you lost your mom and your dad within 15 months and that you basically brought up and supported your then 13-year-old sister, darlene and some of your friends suggested
that might have been a reason why you never got married. we can't put you on the psychiatric couch. how did those -- traumatic events how did they shape your life sir? >> it changed me and helped me realize the promise of tomorrow is just a promise that i assumed things early on i never assumed again. my aunt and uncle helped me raise my sister. social security survivor benefits coming into my family made a world of difference. i moved in with an aunt and uncle who raised my sister and never made over $25,000 in her life working at textile plants. my mom's hodge kin's disease wiped us out financially. we eventually lost our business, i understand we're all one car wreck away from needing help. what it taught lindsey graham that family and friends and faith do matter. i'm a lucky man to have the support i've had all these years and trying my best to pay back
national polls he's far behind clinton but runs ahead of the two other likely candidates martin o'malley and jim web. senator sanders welcome to fox news sunday. >> good to be with you. >> senator, you say that you are considering running against hillary clinton among other reasons because you doubt whether or not she's willing to take on the billionaires in america. here's what she said during a rollout in iowa this week. >> there's something wrong when hedge fund managers pay lower tax rates than nurses or the truckers that i saw on i-80 as i was driving here over the last two days. >> senator don't you believe her? >> well, she's absolutely right but it's not a question of running against hillary clinton or taking on hillary clinton. what we are seeing, chris, right now is that for 40 years the american middle class has been disappearing millions are
working longer hours despite a huge increase in technology and productivity. and what we have seen during that period is a massive transfer of trillions of dollars from the middle class to the top one tenth of one percent of america. massive wealth and income inequality where you have 99% of all new income today going to the top 1% and top one tenth of one percent -- >> if i may, you told bloomberg that you had serious doubts about whether she was willing to take on billionaire class. what are those doubts? >> that's it. but it's -- my point is it's not just hillary clinton -- >> i'm asking about hillary clinton though, sir. >> the answer, if i can please the answer is that i think that that is the fight that we have to wage if we're going to save the middle class. i do have doubts about whether hillary clinton or whether any republican candidate out there is prepared to take on the big
money interest who controls so much of our economy and as a result of citizens united, our political process as well. >> but clinton says that she wants to be the champion of the middle class. again, here she is in iowa this week. >> the deck is still stacked in favor of those already at the top. and there's something wrong with that. there's something wrong when ceos make 300 times more than the typical worker. >> what does senator clinton -- or secretary clinton need to do to persuade you that she's the one to take on this fight? >> well what she said is absolutely right. i think from a moral issue, ceos should not be making 300 times more than their workers are making. but what we need to do chris is to understand that in america, if we're going to be successful and taking on the billionaire class we need a strong national grass roots
movement. what the secretary will have to convince the american people is in fact based on her past record and her views today, that she is going to break up the major banks on wall street. that she is going to ask the wealthiest people in this country to start paying their fair share of taxes. she's going to end the abomination of major corporations making billions and stashing money in the cayman islands and not paying a nickel in federal income tax. that she's prepared to deal with our disastrous trade policies -- >> let me ask you about the trade policy. when she was secretary of state, clinton said she favored a trade deal with our 11 pacific partners and fast tracked authority to make that happen. that's something congress is now considering and now secretary clinton says she wants to wait and see. is this an issue for you? >> chris you're looking at a guy who was in the house and in the senate voted against all of
these terrible trade agreements and permanent normal trade relations with china. all of the big money and trust and by the way republicans and democrats, we're going to create all of these jobs by having a trade agreement with china. the answer is they were wrong wrong, wrong. over the years we have lost millions of decent paying jobs and these trade agreements have forced wages down in america so the average worker in america today worked longer hours for lower wages. i don't have to wait and see. i'm against this trade -- >> is that a litmus test for you to see whether or not clinton comes out against the tpp? >> i know where my view is. i hope very much the secretary comes out against it. i think we do not need to send more jobs to low wage countries. i think corporate america has got to start investing in this country and create decent paying jobs here. >> let me talk to you about bernie sanders now not hillary
clinton. you callyourself a democratic socialist, one of the things you favor is a single payer health care system. but that has in effect fizzled in your own state of vermont. i want to talk about why, when it turned out that singer payer would have meant 11.5% increase in taxes on all businesses and 9.5% tax hike on individuals, the democratic governor of vermont dropped the plan as unfeasible. this is in your own state of vermont, they said we can't afford the single payer. >> well chris let's take a look what's going on around the world in terms -- >> sir, if i may -- if i may, sir, i'm asking about a specific question of vermont and they had a plan to impose a single -- implement a single payer health care system in vermont and democratic governor ended up dropping it. >> well, for a variety of
reasons he did. but the united states remains the only major country on earth that doesn't guarantee health care and we're spending almost twice per much per capita. we have a dysfunctional system and i do believe in a medicare for all single payer system. a small state like vermont can lead the nation or california or some other station at the end of the day we need a cost effective high quality health care system. >> i want to get much as as we can into this. you also want a 50% cut in military spending at a time when isis and al qaeda are on the march -- >> a what percent? >> 50. >> no i don't. what i do believe -- what i do believe is that there is enormous waste in the military in the department of defense. the department of defense can't
even audit itself. of course isis is a terrible organization that has to be defeated and of course we need a strong military. but just as with every other agency of government, you know what, the military also has got to get rid of waste and fraud and cost over us. i want a strong military but do not believe among other things that without an audit we should be throwing tens of billions of dollars into the department of defense. >> final question sir and it's sort of three-part. what are you going to decide when you're going to run? how are you going to decide to run? and what are the chances you'll run right now? >> well i think we'll make that decision pretty soon. not dissimilar from what lindsey graham had to say, when you have super pacs and billionaires able to spend hundreds and millions of dollars on the candidate of their choice, making sure you have the money to run a credible
campaign is very very important and that's one of the factors we're going to have to determine. >> he said it's a 91% chance he's going to run. i'm being as specific as he is. >> we'll see. we're working on it and we will make the best decision we can within the near future. >> real quickly if you run against secretary clinton do you really realistically you've been in politics 35 years. you realistically think you can win or is this to make a point and bring her closer to you on these issues? >> chris, good question. i would not run unless i thought we could win. i think there is a lot of discontent out there on the part of ordinary people who feel the system is grossly stacked against them. >> senator sanders, thank you and thankds for joining us. please come back sir. >> thank you very much. >> up next, our sunday group analyzes a busy week at this early stage of the presidential race. what do you think about who's up and who's down for 2016?
champion and i want to be that champion. you can get ahead and stay ahead. >> hillary clinton striking a populist note as she rolled out her run for president. it's time for our sunday group. jackie kucinich and karl rove and brit, what do you make of clinton's first week as a formal candidate. >> she's at a state in her political life that she is who she is that doesn't mean that she couldn't have the common touch. she could but i don't think she does. her husband had it fdr who was certainly a rich guy and blue blood and all that but hillary doesn't. i don't think it will go very far, has no real pressure for the democratic nomination and
she's trying to present herself in a more favorable light than in iowa eight years ago and perhaps she'll succeed in that. but at the end of the day she is who she is. >> jackie, what struck you about clinton's rollout and i want to pick up on a question i was going back and forth with with bernie sanders about is she going to have trouble campaigning as a champion of the middle class, going up against big money when she and her husband have such a long history with $300,000 speeches and million dollar contributions multimillion dollar contributions from foreign governments to the foundation. >> i think it is a hard move for her to pull. she was also making $200,000 for speeches not too long ago. that's where you're hearing the emphasis on the populist rhetoric and her saying these things to mitigate that idea. but i will say i think it was very telling when she was talking about hedge funders and
talking about reducing -- how much they make when you saw the wall street reaction, they were kind of like, they are not too worried about it. unless there's action -- >> because they think she's what -- >> they think it's going to be fine and don't think anything is go to happen. >> and hillary clinton will be a friend of wall street. >> hillary will be a friend of wall street. >> there was a lot of action on the republican side with senator marco rubio formally getting into the republican race and he took a shot at hillary clinton. here it is. >> just yesterday a leader from yesterday began a campaign for president by promising to take us back to yesterday. >> what are rubio's chances, especially against his political mentor, jeb bush. when you look at 21 potential candidates up in new hampshire this weekend, how do you sort out the republican? how will it sort itself out?
>> he'll be a strong candidate off to a strong start and clearly in the first year and probably prepared himself better than anyone else for this moment. he went out and no one paid attention. but in 2013 and early 2014, he made seven substantive speeches about policy to show he was educating himself about the issues and figuring out where he stood and launched into this with one of the most important things a candidate can have, which is an understanding of the issues that together make up a message. he's off to a strong start and it will be in the first -- how do you sort out 21 candidates? i think there will be 15 or 16 at the end of the day, declared candidates on the balance lots in the four state that began that process in february. i think it's still going to be confused. by the end of february we'll be down to five or six candidates that tended to be towards the top and have the message and resources to fight it on through. it ain't going to be easy and particularly going to be difficult when we come around to
debates. the first debate is in august. how -- >> on fox news. >> and house republican national committee said they want a reasonable number of participants and they are going to set triggers based on standing in the polls and the amount of money raised and that will keep the more flam boy ant candidates from being on the stage. we'll have an ugly mess as we get closer to the august -- >> before i bring in -- one other candidate chris christie who made a strong speech about reforming entitlements especially social security, is he -- how much trouble is he in? to what degree do you think he can breathe life into the campaign? >> he's got to campaign while things are still being -- until that u.s. attorney says here's my final decision and we're done, he has got difficulties. i thought what was interesting
about this it shows two things about him. one is he's willing to be bold. he went out there and said here's specific things i do to tackle entitlements and shows he's not panicking. he understands his fate is largely determined by what the u.s. attorney does and in the meantime not going to panic. he'll dig his way out of the hole by being straight forward and direct. i thought it was a good recovery. he was clearly not in the first year of the candidates where he was a year ago. >> i want to switch subjects and ask you about the holdoff of the confirmation vote on the nomination of loretta lynch to be the first black woman attorney general, president obama went after the republicans heart on that this week. >> it's gone too far. enough. enough. let her do her job. >> now lynch was nominated
almost six months ago back in november, i guess i had two questions, what do you think of the holdup of the nomination and two, do you think it's something that republicans -- that democrats can use effectively against republicans and make them pay a political price for holding up the nomination of a black woman to a top position? >> well, in answer to your first question, i think it is more political than racial. but, yes, there's a big risk for the republicans in a race especially with hillary clinton and likely democratic nominee and contest that will focus on the possibilities as the first woman president to be six months suspending up the nomination of a black woman who is eminently qualified, both sides say she's been a skilled prosecutor, tough on crime, tough on terrorism. just terrific. and she's being held up. the second rift in a year of women, the abortion issue in terms of human trafficking bill is what is causing this delay --
>> holding up her nomination until they settle this issue about human trafficking? >> correct what mitch mcconnell said because there are five republicans who said they will vote with the democrats to confirm, if there is a vote as you saw obama calling for, she'll be confirmed. this is about mitch mcconnell saying let's hold up on that until we get the other issue settled and that creates something that democrats will be able to use to beat republicans about the head. >> let me ask you, we have a minute left at a time when republicans want to show they are reaching out to minorityies does it make political sense to hold up this nomination? >> no, it doesn't. from that perspective, here's the other perspective the democrats are using the human trafficking bills language that has been there for 40 years, saying our price for passing this bill, the guideline language in the trafficking bill is you've got to remove it. the democrats -- republicans have got very few leverage to say to the democrats we want to keep in place the language that has been approved on a
bipartisan basis for 40 years. >> i get it. i get it. it gets lost but it's an important principle and important to remember democrats are trying to undo a 40-year bipartisan agreement that no funds will be used for abortion. >> i'm not a senator and i see it both ways. that republicans -- trying to play to the abortion crowd by saying let's undo the language there for 40 years. >> both are there to confirm her, when this is straightened out, she will be confirmed. by an overwhelming vote. all of the rest of this will reseed into the back ground as detail. i don't think it will affect things one way or the other. >> democrats don't want a vote in the senate to undo the language. they want the republicans to remove the language so they don't have to go on record saying i'm in favor -- >> >> you think joe manchin wants to vote for that?
no they did not. it was there in the bill and democrats -- >> who voted for it? >> that's crazy. >> juan, it's dangerous for you to keep doing this kind of stuff and me having to correct you. >> it was hidden. >> the democrat sponsor admits it was in the bill and she voted for it. >> we're going to take a break here. when we come back. the gyrocopter incident on the capital lawn raises new questions about security in the nation's capital. we'll talk to jason chaffetz what would you like to ask the panel about the long string of security lapses? go to facebook or twitter and we may use your question on the air.
a look at oklahoma city where they are remembering the 168 people killed and hundreds more injured in the bombing of the federal building there 20 years ago today. this tragic anniversary comes as washington is still reeling over a shocking security lapse here this week. joining us now the chairman of the houseover sight committee jason chaffetz. let's go back to that astonishing video from this week of a postal working flying down the national mall highly restricted area 56 and landing on the west lawn of the u.s. capital, norad the faa, secret service, the capital police, all have jurisdiction. who do you hold responsible for this security breach, sir? >> well, one of the problems is you have a 32 federal agencies or 32 law enforcement agencies i should say within washington, d.c. with some degree of
jurisdiction and so you worry about the coordination and communication but certainly the capital hill police and united states secret service which were evidently notified well in advance this person foreshad doied they were going to come in and do this. then you need to have visibility, you look at norad and the basic flight control out of reagan whether or not you can see what's coming towards the airport and towards the national mall. >> your staff is drafting a letter to the secret service which as you point out had interviewed this fellow twice because he had put out on the internet the fact that he was thinking about doing this as far back as 2013. what else is your committee considering doing to try to rectify this situation? >> they are going to be giving us a briefing myself and elijah cummings and other committees that want to join us, we needed a few days for them to sort out their store rixt the tampa bay times reported and evidently at least in their reporting said they had called the capitol hill
police and called the secret service 30 minutes prior. i can tell you as a member of congress we get an alert if something is going to happen at the capitol. that never happened that day. all we got is the all clear at the end. i got a lot of questions about what did they do? who communicated with who? and what are they going to do about it? unfortunately that aura of inevitability that law enforcele will prevail if there's a gyrocopter, i think we're going to have more and more of this. what are we going to do about it? >> this is the latest in a long line of security lapses. last month in march, two agents drove into an active bomb investigation near the white house last september of course that man jumped the fence and got into the white house. i've got to ask you and he's been up before your committee, do you still have confidence in secret service director joseph
clancy? >> well, before when the fence jumping incident happened, there was an independent panel put forward by the secretary of homeland security. unanimously they said they wanted somebody from the outside who could be that transformative figure to change the secret service. mr. clancy is a wonderful human being but he isn't that transformative person. i have real concerns about it. remember, a woman drove up outside the white house, dropped off what she said was a bomb then she just drove off. there wasn't this net that took her down and captured her. it took them two days to capture this deranged woman. how does that happen time and time again? >> let me press the point. are you -- do you think we need a new secret service director, especially given the failure of the secret service in this latest case? >> we're going to give them a chance this week to come in and explain what it is they knew and what sort of communication? were they in contact? did they pro actively decide not
to take this person down? if they did want to take them down, what were they going to do about that? i have long said that i think that director clancy was the wrong choice by president obama. i have not called for him to be fired at this point or to step down. i have with the case of the dea hearings that we had this week but i got real concerns what are they doing pro actively and what are they going to do in the future. >> i want to pick up on what you just mentioned. you had hearings not just with the secret service but also with the drug enforcement administration and that was over a case where it turned out that in columnombia some agents were involved in so-called sex parties being paid for by the drug cartel they were supposedly trying to police. and interestingly enough, both when you talked to clancy and secret service and head of the dea, they both told you they can't fire somebody just because
of allegations of misconduct. take a look at this. >> i don't have the ability to just fire people at will in the government. my understanding is you cannot do that. >> everybody else can be fired. why can't you fire people that work for snu. >> under the civil service laws, i can't intervene in the disciplinary process. >> chairman, is that true? can't these people be fired and can't you if that is true can't you do something about it? >> what you can inject yourself into is revoking the security clearances. as we heard testimony if you don't have a security clearance, you can work at the secret service or work at the dea. i'm not buying it. remember after there was a high profile incident down in colombia, they did fire a number of secret service agents and later fired dea agents. when they were caught again, they hadn't done that. they literally had given these people between 2 and 14 days
paid leave. that sounds like a vacation to me. i'm not buying that. are there changes in the law? we'll look at making those changes. >> do you think that we're getting sloppy, that this many years after 9/11 we're letting down our guard? what's the implication for national security? >> when you take them down hard, never getting into the capitol or white house, when you don't do that? you have real deranged people and so at us. that can never ever happen. these are no-fail missions. we have to make sure they never fail and we need to make sure they know we have their back. >> congressman chaffetz, thank you. we want to continue this discussion with our panel. carl, you were the deputy chief of staff under george h.w. bush.
are those agencies correct, that basically no matter how much these folks mess up in what they are doing, that you have to go through a long, ar due wous civil process? >> i think that's right. you can revoke their clearance and send them to siberia but to fire them is difficult. what we learned here in this particular incident apparently it's not just the rain nor sleet nor hail that could keep the mail man from his appointed rounds, apparently neither could . it's the capitol police that have the responsibility for the area around the capitol. i hope there's a top-to-bottom behind the scenes review. this guy got in a gyrocopter and flew under the radar. what if he had a bomb? i hope they look at these procedures. one more thing about clancy, i agree with the commission that they should have brought somebody in from the outside. that was not president obama's
decision. clancy is a first-rate individual and if anybody can turn it around, he can turn it around but he needs the time and tools to do so. >> we asked you questions for the panel and we got this on facebook from michael who writes, "why do these people have their jobs when they are not doing their job? they should be fired if they were not doing their job". >> there's no question about that. that's self-evident. michael, i would say to you that we needless emphasis on the hysteria and the fear and the firing and more emphasis on the idea that we are an open democratic society. we -- you know pennsylvania avenue has closed off people who live here and -- >> are you saying the guy in the gyrocopter should be able to -- >> no. we have to address that but we can do that sensibly. this idea that we should be more
militaristic, that we should have shut down this mail carrier, if he was a black muslim, we maybe would have. >> but they shot that woman who drove her car who led police on a chase. so that's happened. so it's very serious. what struck me about this how you saw officials joking about this guy and flying his copters onto the lawn. it's not funny. it's serious. the lack of -- i think that's where the complacency comes in when you see somebody like secretary johnson laughing about this in retrospect and that shocked me. >> there's a pattern here. there's a pattern of management failure. secret service, dea, veterans administration, dhs trying to get that website up and running. across this sprawling bureaucracy, we're seeing a pattern of repeated management failure. that's the picture that needs to be looked at. this government is not well-managed and we need people and above that leadership and
better management. >> i agree with that. i'm just saying, we don't need to be the kremlin here. we have so many police forces. there are 32 agencies. >> they are pretty good at enforcing parking. >> but wait a minute, i'm a little surprised, juan. when he was in the air, we didn't know what he was carrying with him. he could have been carrying a bomb, a chemical agent. to say we shouldn't have shot him down, you didn't know what he was carrying. >> no. but i don't think we need to be extreme and hysterical. we need to close that gap and make sure that -- >> whoa. >> i would. here was -- >> you would shoot anybody a vehicle coming down the mall, you don't know who it is. >> we don't know who it is or what they have. >> would you shoot it down or not? >> i said no. >> no matter what? >> not no matter what. if i know this is a direct threat. >> if there is incompetence that you're talking about, they interviewed this guy and
apparently knew he was coming and told them two hours before, that's -- but to start shooting everybody and -- >> everybody? not everybody flies in a gyrocopter towards the capitol. >> shoot him down. and now that he wasn't shot down, throw the book at him. if they violate the no-fly standards in washington, down they go. >> they let the guy out of jail so quickly. i thought for sure he would stay in jail. >> well you're the one who is talking about the kremlin. we do have habeus corpus here and we have bail. >> we'll be right back with a final note. when eating healthy and drinking water just isn't enough to ease my constipation i trust dulcolax tablets. i take dulcolax for dependable overnight relief
a look at the unveiling of a banner honoring the victims in the terror attack on the boston marathon two years ago. they are running that race again tomorrow. for more on that and the race for the white house, stay tuned to this fox nation and fox newschannel. and that's it for today. have a great week and we'll see